January 3, 2013

"They've been losing ever since," says the new cover of Time Magazine:

You need a subscription to read the article, but here's a shorter post by the author, Kate Pickert:

The pro-life cause has been winning the abortion war, in part, because it has pursued an organized and well-executed strategy. But public opinion is also increasingly on their side. Thanks to prenatal ultrasound and advanced neonatology, Americans now understand what a fetus looks like and that babies born as early as 24 weeks can now survive....

The prochoice establishment has also been hampered by a generational divide within the cause. Young abortion rights activists today complain that the leaders of feminist organizations, who were in their 20s and 30s when Roe was decided, aren’t eager to pass the torch to a new generation whose activism is more nimble and Internet-based.

In what form are these metaphorical torches passed? When and where do elder leaders step down and cede power to youngsters? If their activism is so "nimble," why can't they grab the power they want? Or is this a special "feminist" theory that the older women ought to get out of the way? Back in the day, expecting older women to get out of the way was regarded as an anti-feminist notion. Well, too bad I don't have a Time subscription or I'd investigate the details of these young activists and their whiny ways.

102 comments:

The women's movement, including the pro-abortion segment is all about money. Ralph Nader said so some years ago. The reason why the alleged tea party organization and Dick Armey parted is the same. It's all about the money. Why should those older women allow the young ones to get their rice bowl ?

"And pro-life state legislators are passing laws that require clinics to comply with arcane requirements—such as a hallway having to be more than five feet wide— that make it difficult for them to stay open."

Next they'll require them to comply with the ADA and install wheelchair ramps! Will justice never be done!

could it also be the "Roe effect" on demographics? If you favor killing your offspring, there are fewer of your kind to pass the torch to. Their numbers must necessarily asymtotically approach zero. As the KS prosecution of the semen donor to a lesbian couple will have the same effect....math catches up with them.

pduggie said... "And pro-life state legislators are passing laws that require clinics to comply with arcane requirements—such as a hallway having to be more than five feet wide— that make it difficult for them to stay open."

Personally I love watching leftists frothing at the mouth when tactics they invented are used against them. It would be even better if they learned from the experience and agreed to legislate honestly, but there's no point in fantasizing.

Just took a calculated risk with a risk adverse bureaucracy. For what it's worth, I asked my class of inner city teenagers if they knew of anybody who has had an abortion. ZERO hands went up. And these are kids who'll tell me anything and everything.

garage, if it is any consolation, the gun ban issue is all about the money, too. Don't you think Feinstein knows her ban won't pass ? That won't stop the flow of money to her. Ditto for the NRA but they have a president who is doing the fund raising for them. What luck !

The court's decision in Roe vs Wade is unconstitutional. America's national charter, The Declaration of Independence, recognizes an individual's unalienable rights from "creation", which may be considered biological, or perhaps conscious. The Constitution, with the Fourteenth Amendment, confirms that no citizen shall be deprived of their life without due process. Elective abortion, certainly, is illegal under our law. Abortion in general is execrable. The choice, with rare exception, occurs before a man and woman have sex.

All of the abortion policies practiced in this nation, including: Eugenics, Roe vs Wade, the euphemistic "reproductive rights", are illegal under our law. First, because our right to life is inalienable. Second, because our right to life cannot be taken without due process. The mother has no right to elective abortion of her child under American law. The State cannot sanction the termination of a life without due process.

garage mahal said... Seemingly nothing can be done to curb gun deaths. Just a fact of life.

As usual for the brain dead left, your timing is impeccable:

While Chicagoans saw the city's homicides rise past 500 last year, residents of the state's second largest city, Aurora, quietly observed a milestone of their own — a year without a slaying....During the city's more violent years, Aurora police and city officials blamed gang tensions, in part, for higher slaying totals, according to media reports. Thomas attributed the drop to "proactive police work."

With eugenics, it was an involuntary generational genocide. However, with Roe vs Wade and "reproductive rights", it has become an elective generational genocide. All the various incarnation are promoted by the same class of people with the same motive: remove undesirables and competing interests.

Presumably, this is why we invite excessive legal immigration, which exceeds the rate of assimilation, and illegal immigration, which is unmeasured and wholly disruptive. The redistributive change schemes in this nation are simple pyramid schemes. They cannot survive without a compliant and growing population. The key in this is compliant. Authentic Americans, who are true to the founding principles of this nation, do not generally yield to minority control and subjugation (e.g. government).

I think the torch should be passed after menopause. The last of the Boomer women are pretty much incapable of getting pregnant. Just as no man would be allowed to head one of these pro abortion rights groups, no woman who can get pregnant should head one either.

As for the generational conflict, today's "progressive" is tomorrow's conservative. The "progressive" movement is unqualified and unprincipled. It was and is a reactive movement, which should have ended shortly after its first expression.

Its enduring nature is explained by people exploiting differentials and gradients, and appealing to men and women's base nature, in order to advance their political, economic, and social standing. In short, it is profitable to exploit dreams of instant (or immediate) gratification, whether it is material, physical, or ego.

The Court, in Roe vs. Wade, based its rationale mainly on public sentiments, historical and contemporary, about first trimester pregnancies. It's been awhile since I last read the opinions, but my recollection is that the Court "found" it unconstitutional to ban abortions in that first trimester, not in the third, and maybe not even in the second. Since then, abortions have been performed later and later in the pregnancy. As far as I know, there are no legal barriers in any state to performing an abortion one second before birth....and there are even cases of "abortions" being performed after birth (because it's just a "medical decision" between the mother and her doctor.) So how has the pro-abortion movement lost ground?

The fight for "abortion rights" is what defines these folks and they've haven't had the foresight to build a lasting organization that is healthy enough to cultivate younger people and give them increased responsiblity over time.

Also, these types of movements are so very emotional and the younger feel they should take leadership roles right away, so they gravitate towards creating their own parallel organizations that are in competition with longer established organizations.

It's a pretty hard argument convincing people to terminate life, as a moral choice.

The only consistent, moral argument is that if you want to have sex, there is a risk that contraception will not prevent a pregnancy and you should take responsibility for your actions by growing up and raising the child, or placing it for adoption.

It's been awhile since I last read the opinions, but my recollection is that the Court "found" it unconstitutional to ban abortions in that first trimester, not in the third, and maybe not even in the second.

It wasn't quite like that. Roe said that there could be no state regulation of of first-trimester abortion; that it could be regulated in the second trimester, but only in order to safeguard the woman's health; and that it could be prohibited in the third trimester, albeit with exceptions for the health of the woman, including mental health.

I would like the abortion community and their activists to admit that partial birth abortion is infanticide. I would like them to "Woman Up" and "hear them roar," that hell yeah it's infanticide and we're damned proud of it too! Own it!

In fact, I wonder if the pro-choice movement might be why there are more male mass murderers than female mass murderers.

A woman who wishes she never existed can fight to keep others from being born. An extreme pro-choice man comes across as creepy and exploitative, so he has to focus his elimination of other lives on those who've already passed through the birth canal...

I think we need to ease up on abusing Garage Mahal. I was in Milwaukee this summer and saw a picture of one of his relatives. Not a lot of depth in that gene pool. But on the other hand he really is a nice guy.

Conversely, one common complaint we often hear from the older generations is that today's young women take their reproductive rights for absolute granted, because they have never known any other reality. Thus, the argument goes, they are laconic, not inclined to stand their ground with the necessary energy.

The argument Ann links to is the first I have seen in mainstream discourse, that suggests younger people are energetically engaged with this issue but that they are not represented in the leadership of women's rights organizations.

Personally, I suspect both arguments are true and oversimplified at the same time.

One "interesting" thing about the lion's share of the comments in this thread and others that approach the abortion issue, is that they so often depend on the assumption that the women who have abortions are politically motivated, and that they are of course liberals. Stupid assumption, that.

That's an interesting theory. It offers insight into a distinguishing feature between male and female murderers: access. They enjoy the control they can exert over other people's lives, up to and including its elective termination. However, even psychopaths (e.g. Sandy Hook lunatic) consider opportunity costs when they need to express their degenerate will. The female's physiology imposes constraints on physical expression of their will, which would suggest they prefer their victims to be unarmed and compliant, and ideally incapable of either verbal or physical protest. This makes a human life in the womb an ideal candidate to suffer from their psychotic behavior.

Folks, the problem is people like Ann have backed themselves into a corner. They have to defend abortion at all costs, or risk the awful realization of just what it is that they have been supporting for so long. I imagine it must be something like the dupes in Germany who supported the NAZIs, only to finally realize the evil they had helped bring about.

Garage: "Seemingly nothing can be done to curb gun deaths. Just a fact of life."

Law and Order seems to work just fine when you get rid of liberal mayors and governors, and punish the criminals. That's how you can lower down the crime rate, including the gun deaths. Surely we can get back to 1960ies crime rates - but we need to abolish a lot of liberal laws and get rid of liberal judges.

If garage opens his mind he will find out that the GOP specifically proposed numerous ways to cut crime rates, and it was the liberals who proclaimed that nothing good be done to stop the criminals - except hugging him and giving him a flower.

For a superb "road map through the supreme court's back alley" of the (bad) law of Roe v. Wade, see http://www.law.villanova.edu/lawreview/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/Forsythe-Vol57-1.pdf. Great read.

On another note, yes, young people are trending towards being pro-let-it-live, suck it up not out etc. It's just that they are not heard over the loud ugly screeches of the aged, bitter spinsters in academia.

Just today there was a story about a baby that was being delivered through a Caesarian section and while it was happening it reached out and grabbed the doctors hand with its tiny fingers.Ad all the reporters oohed and ahheded about the miracle.

I bet if you scooped out its brains and had a camera on it while you did it it might reach out its cute little hands too, while it was writhing in its death throes.

Just showing the optics of what being pro choice is all about. We should have the media show us THAT image and then ooh and ash about the glory of choosing to kill it.

What would be really nice would be ripping the baby apart, then before dumping the body parts in a plastic bag you could have a picture of the little baby hands gripping the hands of the doctor who killed it.

Just today there was a story about a baby that was being delivered through a Caesarian section and while it was happening it reached out and grabbed the doctors hand with its tiny fingers. Ad all the reporters oohed and ahheded about the miracle.

I bet if you scooped out its brains and had a camera on it while you did it it might reach out its cute little hands too, while it was writhing in its death throes.

Just showing the optics of what being pro choice is all about. We should have the media show us THAT image and then ooh and ash about the glory of choosing to kill it.

What would be really nice would be ripping the baby apart, then before dumping the body parts in a plastic bag you could have a picture of the little baby hands gripping the hands of the doctor who killed it.

Remember, it's still a 'fetus' because only one arm was sticking out. You see what I did right there?

Liberals have "choices", while conservatives have children. For the past 40 years, liberals have been aborting their future voters. Had they had all of the babies they chose to abort and indoctrinated them, there would be a much larger cohort of liberals. This doesn't show up at the presidential level, where Obama and his handlers managed to bamboozle the American people again. However, at the state level, Republicans made significant gains in governors and majority-Republican legislatures.

Clyde....but while the liberals kill their future voters they indoctrinate ours...and quite well I might add. Check out America-lite. A great read about how the American education system and "intellectuals" have transformed this country. Our conservative children are not safe from this culture. Try as we may as parents, they will inevitably fall prey to these methods.

2. Althouse, your denial of knowledge about how to pass a torch to the younger generation of females is touchingly unconvincing, but fear not - your mad internet skillz will keep you relevant for some time to come.